I've accused the U.S. (specifically the CIA, but also others) of
pre-knowledge of the 911 attacks, such that they allowed them. Their
motivation is apparent. It was to 'inspire' the people of the U.S. to
a war with Arabia by the emotional impact of the loss of the World
Trade Center skyscrapers, and the loss of the lives in them. People
were sacrificed, they were murdered for a cause.
The politics are this, the defeat of Islam by Democracy on the world
stage. This as opposed to protecting democratic states from Islamic
influence by such methods as immigration restraint, and isolating
troublesome countries.
The former is a global perspective and global manipulation. It also
pure politics -- as in putting all hopes in a political method. The
latter is 'isolationism', but also a social and culteral perspective.
I would think this more realistic, as the Afghannies are what they are
because of who they are, not from political choice. Those who prefer a
'soveriegn' approach to their own countries would be thankful the
latter, INCLUDING the terrorists. The CIA, however, is not
soveriegn-minded.
The terrorists, Al Qaeda, did the leg-work. It was expected,
predictable. The CIA just waited for the terrorists to plan something
really mean, enough to get the American people angry, then the CIA
allowed those plans to take place. In effect, in truth, the CIA were
long-term collaborators on the destruction of the World Trade Center
and the loss of lives of many people; all for a global political
cause, as are the terrorists.
My proof of U.S. knowledge of the WTC/D.C. attacks is from Bush's
actions on that date. He was conveniently reading to the children in
his brother's home state at the time of the attack (how cute), and was
seen being told about it while on that stage. His "Good evening, Good
night" speech on the night of 911. And, a few days later, his
conquering climb up the WTC ruins, to throw his arms around a
fire-fighter. It was anything but a sober event.
Bush was placed in the position of taking the heat if any subversive
rumors got out. But Bush WAS NOT responsible for it. Nevertheless,
someone in the government knew of the plans. Apparently, so did
Australia.
Australia's version of the CIA, called the Australian Secret
Intelligence Service, had its method of organization changed, (which
had lasted for nearly 50 years), by a bill that had been introduced in
the month of June before 9/11. Before then, the organization had no
legislative basis. The bill was to correct that.
The apparent intent was for legitimacy, as if someone was fearful of
the public's backlash against clandestine organizations. Apparently
they knew months beforehand; though there is not sufficient evidence
that they collaborated; EXCEPT the CIA has quite an operation in
Australia, with their knowledge and cooperation. At least one page,
http://melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2005/11/99757.php
, describes
arguments between them, as if they were infighting in an organization
that is one and the same. The U.S. would certainly not tolerate an
Aussie organization in the U.S. as the Aussies have put up with the
CIA! Not if we knew it, as they do.
From Wikipedia...
Legislative changes affecting ASIS
Intelligence Services Act 2001
ASIS was created as a result of an Executive Order in 1952, and as
such, had no legislative basis. On 27 June 2001, the Intelligence
Services Act 2001 (ISA) was introduced into Parliament by Minister for
Foreign Affairs Alexander Downer, which proposed significant changes
to the Australian Intelligence Community (AIC). The Act was passed by
Parliament on 29 October 2001.
In relation to ASIS, the Act:
- converted ASIS into a statutory body, headed by the Director
General;
- set out the functions of ASIS and DSD and the limits on those
functions;
- prohibited the use of weapons by ASIS (except for self defence) and
the conduct of violent or para-military operations;
- authorised the minister responsible for each agency to issue
directions to the agency;
- required ministerial authorisation for intelligence collection
activities involving Australians;
- limited the cir***stances in which ministers can authorise
collection of intelligence on Australians;
required the ministers to make rules regulating the communication and
retention by the agencies of intelligence information concerning
Australian persons; and
provided for the establishment of a parliamentary oversight committee,
the Parliamentary Joint Committee on ASIO, ASIS and DSD.
Also from Wikipedia, concerning Foreign Minister Alexander Downer of
Australia, who had introduced the bill above...
In 2003 Downer was accused of not_passing_on_intelligence_re****ts [!]
he received before the 2002 Bali bombings. He countered that the
warnings were not specific enough to warrant their further release to
the Australian public.
Downer sup****ted Australia's participation the Iraq war. He argued
that Iraq, the Middle East and the world would be better off without
the regime of Saddam Hussein and he defended the claim that weapons of
mass destruction would be found in Iraq.
In August 2004 he made a provocative claim that North Korea could
launch Taepo Dong ballistic missile with a range long enough to hit
Sydney, a view disputed by experts.
In August 2006, it was claimed by a former weapons inspector Dr John
Gee, that Downer had in 2004 suppressed information that the search
for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq was fundamentally flawed.
They knew it would happen, and did nothing to stop it.
--
Michael
|
